Since 2008 I’ve been repeating in an amateurish way to be honest but without being wrong at all that since we know that quantization is due to the compact four-sphere geometry of the universe, that quantum mechanics is, despite its accuracy on many experimental fits, is at most an approximation to whatever is the correct physics. This I can deduce as a mathematical consequence of having evidence for the S4 geometry of the universe with all its various implications, one of which would be that nonlinearity of the physical universe in an S4 universe is necessarily quite severe. Of course these qualitative statements do not hold water against a theory that was established by massive efforts and armies of physicists working hard and which led to further investigations that were successful. It is pretty clear that quantum mechanics is quite accurate on measurements. This is not difficult to understand either. If the physical universe is a smooth submanifold of an S4 universe, then in the small, working on the tangent space at a point will produce exceedingly good linear approximations.

Now there is another new wrinkle in this case, which is that besides quantum mechanics the other more directly practical applications of physics to phenomena are nonlinear partial differential equations. The Navier-Stokes equations can be written as a reaction-diffusion type equation

Here is a two or three dimensional vector field on or . This is fairly typical of partial differential equations in applied physics and engineering and Russians had a monumental project of these things to classify the solutions in some way because without the superposition principle one does not have any simple way of classifying solutions. Quantum mechanics with its linear equations are an exception that is probably just an approximation from what I can tell. Now it’s not worthwhile challenging quantum mechanics because a replacement theory requires a lot more vital energy and will and resources than I will be able to command anytime soon but it’s a real hope. My serious comment on this will be that it is very dangerous to go crazy mythologizing intepretation based on a linear approximation. Physicists and scientists in general eschew, as a sacred tradition, anything that smells of mysticism. It’s a religious dogma for them rather than anything else. They are as adamant about this as any Catholic priest will be about his little God. Well, I’m not a pure empiricist and I am as mystical sometimes as Emerson’s Over-Soul. I think the univese is governed by magic beyond the Hell on Earth which came with nuclear bombs and believe that Churchill and Roosevelt should be burning in Hell for what they had brought to this planet, instruments that belong in the lowest circle of Dante’s Inferno. This is not what science is about. This has to change.

## Leave a Reply